About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
forgets that president clinton raised taxes on the wealthy and created 22 million jobs. president bush cut taxes on the wealthy and created 1 million jobs. so his economic expertise is a little behind here. but the truth of the matter is, everybody voted in this election, the president said he would raise taxes on people earning over $250,000. that's what he's going to do. that's what's going to happen. he has the authority of an election behind him. running for office is a difficult thing to do, and the people that win the elections have a lot more moral authority than in a democracy than people who talk about elections. >> ryan, that does seem to be the point. republicans may not like it, but that wasn't what this election said american people want. the majority of them. >> i think it's certainly true you have a large number of americans, 60%, according to a "washington post" abc news poll who favor raising taxes on folks earning more than $250,000 a year. but there are a couple other things to keep in mind, as well. president obama often talks about returning to clinton era tax rates.
, like forever. four days ago we offered a serious proposal, based on testimony of president clinton's former chief of staff. since then, there's been no counteroffer from the white house. instead, reports indicate that the president has adopted a deliberate strategy to slow-walk our economy right to the edge of the cliff. instead of cutting spending, the president want to raise tax rates. but even if the president got the tax rate hike that he wanted, understand that we would continue to see trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. listen, washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. and if the president doesn't agree with our proposal, i believe he has an obligation to families and small businesses, to offer a plan of his own, a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. we're ready and eager to talk to the president about such a plan. >> speaker, you spoke with the president earlier this week. can you characterize this call? if he called, did he have any kind of counteroffer? and also, we understand that he's just making clear that it's got to be
budgets of the clinton years, if we could return to the trillion dollar peace dividend that the bush years left on the doorstep of the clinton years. but none of that is ever examined. also, we also are the beneficiaries of a massive technology bubble and the markets. >> plants and reduced the capital gains tax by 30 percent. he increased the income tax by 10%, but the huge surge in revenues under clinton came through the capital gains tax cut, not from the income-tax increase. lou: you and i have done what the republicans, perhaps too often. we talk about the economics of it, the theory of it, if you will, the extraction of it, but but the reality is the republican party has not come up with a rejoinder, a response to a, if you will, a socialist redistributionist president who right now claims the field is on because there is no other standard flying over that field. there is a speaker of the house to is simply saying, this is not right. you know, we are not at the table and complaining, but not, not engaging. >> i think we have got to engage the argument. we cannot win the argument while
on the people $250,000 and up to what they were under bill clinton. 600,000 new businesses were started, god forbid that should happen again. but the groundhog day element of this stephanie, is this. last year at this time, the president wanted to extent the payroll tax cut. the republicans stamped their feet and wanted tax cut for the wealthy. and the president stood his ground and they undid this by unanimous consent right before christmas. that's what is going to happen this time. >> stephanie: again, they say the president is not being clear. >> obama: just to be clear, i'm not going to sign any package that presents rates going up for folks at the top 2%. >> he wasn't clear enough. he didn't say which country. [ laughter ] >> he has to be much more precise. >> stephanie: jay carney excooed it again. >> a deal by republicans that rates on the top 2% the wealthiest americans, have to rise. there is no deal without that acknowledgment, and without a concrete mathematically sound proposal. >> stephanie: oh my god, i'm reading the chyron right now. the white house has on
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)